Macmillan point out that areas with the highest percentage of deaths each year have the lowest number of people getting support in time.

Juliet Bouverie, director of services and influencing at Macmillan Cancer Support, said: "This analysis shows an inexcusable postcode lottery which is responsible for 6,000 people dying needlessly within 12 months of being diagnosed with cancer every year.

"It is a no-brainer - when patients have to wait longer for diagnosis and treatment their chances of surviving are significantly reduced."

Have you been affected by cancer? Tell us your story by calling 020 8722 6358, or email tom.gillespie@london.newsquest.co.uk

This is not remotely surprising. Visit Richmond, then visit Cheam in Sutton: in the former, 20 mph on all roads near schools, beautifully cared for main streets..in the latter, idiots belting down residential roads at 50 mph - especially past schools! Tells you a lot about how each borough is managed.

Oh - and don't forget, folks - pretty soon Sutton will bear the proud title "Sutton: the borough where all the other boroughs send their waste!" And that includes Richmond. Would anyone like to bet on the figures being even worse for Sutton, after the incinerator has been working for a couple of years?

This is not remotely surprising. Visit Richmond, then visit Cheam in Sutton: in the former, 20 mph on all roads near schools, beautifully cared for main streets..in the latter, idiots belting down residential roads at 50 mph - especially past schools! Tells you a lot about how each borough is managed.
Oh - and don't forget, folks - pretty soon Sutton will bear the proud title "Sutton: the borough where all the other boroughs send their waste!" And that includes Richmond. Would anyone like to bet on the figures being even worse for Sutton, after the incinerator has been working for a couple of years?labyrinth

The figures seem roughly about the same, although Barking is a little different. I dare say that all the figures will change slightly over time as figures tend to. Don't really see much of a story here to tell the truth. The number of people 'needlessly dying' is a bit false if relying on this 'postcode lottery' information, as surely increasing the amount of care in one place and reducing it in another will result in roughly the same number of deaths. If not, then perhaps this article can be expanded to explain why that would not be the case. I'm certainly not making light of cancer deaths, but it's easy to come up with half an argument and say we need to save more lives without explaining how or where the money is coming from.

The figures seem roughly about the same, although Barking is a little different. I dare say that all the figures will change slightly over time as figures tend to. Don't really see much of a story here to tell the truth. The number of people 'needlessly dying' is a bit false if relying on this 'postcode lottery' information, as surely increasing the amount of care in one place and reducing it in another will result in roughly the same number of deaths. If not, then perhaps this article can be expanded to explain why that would not be the case. I'm certainly not making light of cancer deaths, but it's easy to come up with half an argument and say we need to save more lives without explaining how or where the money is coming from.Tony from Surbiton